🚀 go-pugleaf

> PAGE: How many attorney's besides Tony Rutkowski and Dan Steinberg could
> have done the job?  If they were told to respond to the DNS fire?  Probably
> not many, unless the leadership had specifically assigned them
> responsibility months/years before.  Bode had the easy job because to the
> casual observer, he had a case.  It was up to somebody to piece it
> together, to reconstruct history, which meant digging into the details.
> 
Just a clarification.  I agree that there are few people who could have
done the job at the time in the context of putting out the fire. 
However, as Steve points out, given sufficient time the case really only
required someone competent and prepared.  That's a much less exclusive
club, but thanks for the compliment. <g>

I should also point out that I am not admitted to practice law in any US
jurisdiction.  I live in Canada, which makes me something less than a DC
insider.  All this to say that I would have been a less-than-obvious
choice at the time had they been attorney-shopping.

Other than that I think Steve has put forward a fairly balanced
commentary.

One other comment. Gordon made the point that the case would have gone
differently had the facts he was aware of been put on the table.  I
would suggest that neither side puts everything on the table right away
unless they have to.  This is part of the dance that attorneys do. 
Sometimes the mere act of saying "I have something that I could use but
I don't have to" is effective.  

So before rushing to the conclusion that the case should have gone the
other way, remember that even Gordon doesn't know all the facts (sorry
Gordon).  There's plenty on Bode's side that wasn't used.  Why didn't
Bode use it?  It's a tactical decision and it's very hard to
second-guess a winner.

 
Dan Steinberg
MBA LLB BSc		

SYNTHESIS:Law & Technology
Box 532, RR1		phone: (613) 794-5356
Chelsea, Quebec		fax:   (819) 827-4398
J0X 1N0			e-mail:dstein@travel-net.com